This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 573 of the United States Reports :
| Case name | Citation | Date decided |
|---|---|---|
| CTS Corp. v. Waldburger | 573 U.S. 1 | June 9,2014 |
| North Carolina’s statute of repose is not preempted by the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, which instead only preempts state statutes of limitations on bringing state-law environmental tort cases. | ||
| Executive Benefits Ins. Agency v. Arkison | 573 U.S. 25 | June 9,2014 |
| Under Stern v. Marshall, when a bankruptcy court does not have subject matter jurisdiction over a proceeding, the bankruptcy court may still hear the case and issue proposed findings to be reviewed de novo by a federal district court. | ||
| Scialabba v. de Osorio | 573 U.S. 41 | June 9,2014 |
| Lawful residents in the United States who turned twenty-one while their visa applications were being processed could not retain their original application date after "aging out" of eligibility for child-visas. | ||
| POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co. | 573 U.S. 102 | June 12,2014 |
| Reversed and remanded. Neither the Lanham Act nor the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, in express terms, forbids or limits private Lanham Act claims challenging labels that are regulated by the other Act. | ||
| Clark v. Rameker | 573 U.S. 122 | June 12,2014 |
| Funds held in inherited Individual Retirement Accounts are not "retirement funds" and are not exempt from the bankruptcy estate. | ||
| Republic of Argentina v. NML Capital, Ltd. | 573 U.S. 134 | June 16,2014 |
| No provision in the FSIA immunizes a foreign-sovereign judgment debtor from post judgment discovery of information concerning its extraterritorial assets. | ||
| Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus | 573 U.S. 149 | June 16,2014 |
| Pre-enforcement legal challenges have Article III standing when the petitioners' prospect of injury is imminent. | ||
| Abramski v. United States | 573 U.S. 169 | June 16,2014 |
| A person who buys a gun on someone else's behalf while falsely claiming that it is for himself makes a material misrepresentation that violates federal law because it concerns "information required by [Chapter 44 of Title 18 of the United States Code] to be kept" in the dealer's records. | ||
| Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l | 573 U.S. 208 | June 19,2014 |
| Merely requiring generic computer implementation fails to transform an abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention. | ||
| Lane v. Franks | 573 U.S. 228 | June 19,2014 |
| Government employee speech that is made during trial is protected citizen speech, and the employee cannot be fired for comments made in that setting. | ||
| United States v. Clarke | 573 U.S. 248 | June 19,2014 |
| A taxpayer who wants to question Internal Revenue Service agents about their motives for issuing a summons may do so if they can point to "specific facts or circumstances plausibly raising an inference of bad faith." | ||
| Halliburton Co. v. Erica P. John Fund, Inc. | 573 U.S. 258 | June 23,2014 |
| Securities fraud defendants must be afforded an opportunity to rebut the presumption of reliance before class certification with evidence of a lack of price impact. | ||
| Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA | 573 U.S. 302 | June 23,2014 |
| (1) The Clean Air Act neither compels nor permits EPA to adopt an interpretation of the Act requiring a source to obtain a PSD or Title V permit on the sole basis of its potential greenhouse-gas emissions. (2) EPA reasonably interpreted the Act to require sources that would need permits based on their emission of conventional pollutants to comply with BACT for greenhouse gases. | ||
| Loughrin v. United States | 573 U.S. 351 | June 23,2014 |
| A conviction of the crime of knowingly executing a scheme to obtain property owned by, or under the custody of, a bank "by means of false or fraudulent pretenses," does not require the government to prove that a defendant intended to defraud a financial institution. | ||
| Riley v. California | 573 U.S. 373 | June 25,2014 |
| Police generally may not, without a warrant, search digital information on a cell phone seized from an individual who has been arrested. | ||
| Fifth Third Bancorp v. Dudenhoeffer | 573 U.S. 409 | June 25,2014 |
| There is no statutory basis for a 'presumption of prudence' test under ERISA. ESOP fiduciaries share the same duty of care as non-ESOP fiduciaries. | ||
| ABC v. Aereo, Inc. | 573 U.S. 431 | June 25,2014 |
| Aereo's retransmission of television broadcasts was a "public performance" of the networks' copyrighted work. The Copyright Act of 1976 forbids such performances without the permission of the holder of the copyright. | ||
| McCullen v. Coakley | 573 U.S. 464 | June 26,2014 |
| The provisions of the Reproductive Health Care Facilities Act limiting protesting within 35 feet of an abortion clinic violate the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. | ||
| NLRB v. Canning | 573 U.S. 513 | June 26,2014 |
| 1. The Recess Appointments Clause empowers the President to fill any existing vacancy during any recess—intra-session or inter-session—of sufficient length. 2. For purposes of the Recess Appointment Clause, the Senate is in session when it says that it is if, under its own rules, it retains the capacity to transact business. | ||
| Harris v. Quinn | 573 U.S. 616 | June 30,2014 |
| The First Amendment prohibits the collection of an agency fee from Rehabilitation Program PAs who do not want to join or support the union. | ||
| Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. | 573 U.S. 682 | June 30,2014 |
| As applied to privately held for-profit corporations, a contraceptive mandate under the Department of Health and Human Services regulations violate the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 because they are substantial burdens under that law. Assuming that guaranteeing cost-free access to the four challenged contraceptive methods is a compelling governmental interest, the government must show that such a mandate is the least restrictive means of furthering that interest. | ||